I regret making the same point over and over... but I am trying to actually get the guy to address it. Sorry.

You are bring up guys who have brought DECADES of success to single teams, not just 1 season. That is the point I am trying to make, this is a ONE season deal. In Warner's case he has brought SEVERAL years of relevence to the Cardinals and a trip to the Superbowl for a team that hadn't even dreamed of going to the Superbowl I would call that success. Had Farve been planning to play for the Vikings for three to four years I would say this was a successful season. The point I am making is the Vikings are not going to be successful if they lose this weekend and then lose Farve to retirement. At that point they wasted an entire season for nothing. How can that be considered a success? An NFC championship would be an acceptable consolation prize, but nothing less. If Farve does come back next year then I will yeild the point that he was successful this year. But if he doesnt comeback then this thing accomplished nothing. Oh woohoo we gave it out best shot and didnt get it done; now we are team that is a year older and worse - according to you guys because Farve makes them better so without him they are worse than they currently are - than we were last year when we couldnt win it all! I am failing to see where there is any success in that.


Now lets say that they had played Tavaris this season and he put up decent numbers and led them to a playoff victory, that is something that would carry over to the next season and leave them in a good spot. That is my point. If Farve was more than a one possibly two year stop gap player it would be completely different.

 

-----signature-----

Also in Matt's case, they gave him a shot to be the man prior to last season, don't forget that he blew it; he was above Warner to start the preseason last year. He has had his chances and failed. Tavaris deserves a chances to prove he can be the man. That is all I am saying, I am not saying he is going to be a great quarterback for years to come, only that based on what he did to finish the year last year he deserved his chance.

 

-----signature-----

Here I go again, apologies to all:





Every quarterback we have brought up has either 1 or 0 championships. I thought you weren't interested in regular season success?

Bottom line is you're holding the guy to a different standard because he was signed to a one year contract. That makes no sense. You're actually arguing against yourself, because a guy who fails to get it done in a one off experiment actually brings his team down less than a guy who fails to get it done over the course of many years. You're being totally illogical and inconsistent in your arguments. The only leg you have to stanbd on is if Favre was brought in and it knocked a prospect off track, but there is no indication that it will knock Jackson off track, and there is almost less indication that he is even any kind of a prospect. You have no argument, just something you believe.

I have said several times that it is my opinion that it is a failure, not that it was a fact. It is my opinion that if Farve goes one and done the experiment failed this season. I do not believe the Vikings can claim a moral victory considering Farve was supposed to be that last missing piece to get them to the Super bowl. That is part of the difference in the guys you are talking about, they were not signed by a team as the last missing piece to a championship. They were drafted and had a team built around them in most cases, but never got all the tools they needed. Supposedly all the Vikings were missing was a quarterback, they got their quarterback and if they fail to win then it was a failure. Marino wasnt drafted as the last missing piece to the Dolphins winning a championship. Leinart was not drafted as the last missing piece to the Cardinals winning a championship. Farve was signed as the last missing piece to a Vikings championship.


I would compare the Farve experiment to the Chiefs signing Montana back in the 90's. Sure he got them to an AFC championship game but in the end the whole thing was a failure; he failed to deliver the championship, and retired leaving them up the creek without a quarterback. Chiefs never did get that superbowl. Instead of spending those years developing a quarterback to take advantage of a great roster they put their faith in Montana. When the roster was where it needed to be they had no quarterback.

 

-----signature-----

Your reasoning is baffling. Once again, when analyzing your actual points, you end up arguing against yourself. You say it's a failure because he was signed as the last missing piece. That assumes if he hadn't have been the last missing piece, it would have been less of a failure. Only a team not anywhere near a championship would have no reason to pay extra for a veteran QB, whereas a team on the brink has every reason to.

How does it go against my reasoning. He was signed as the missing piece to bring them a championship. If he fails to do so he fails to deliver on what he was brought in to do. That sounds like the definition of failure to me.

 

-----signature-----

So all the other players were brought in to do what? Make balloon animals?

Yeah, they are the halftime entertainment.

 

-----signature-----

Alright Farve, you win, I was wrong you were the right guy for the job this year.


This board is going to be a whole lot less interesting now

 

-----signature-----